Niddy vs HSBC

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Niddy vs HSBC

Hi Niddy,
If they have given further evidence to the FOS that was not disclosed in a SAR, how could that be used against them.

Well the FOS is supposed to be impartial and not take sides this would go some way in proving that the FOS did not act in an impartial way.

[mgfboy]

Re: Niddy vs HSBC

The problem with FOS as I see it is , they go on what they view is fair and whats fair to a multination banking group is not the same as whats fair to us. They don't seem to take into account the law and I suppose they would argue that this gives them the ability to make arguments against the banks etc that arn't legally correct.

They need to review what is fair and take into account the duty of care that a large company should have when dealing with the man on the street, which I know they don't.

I would love to go on the training course the the adjudicators go on to see what standards they apply.

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Niddy vs HSBC

Fair, well you have fair right here in the way niddy is being treated you have fair in the way they took nearly 3 years to resolve my complaint and in the end it was resolved through my intervention with the bank so yes they earn't £500 for jack shite.

I hope the new consumer arm of what will be the old FSA pulls them into line because the FOS is not working as it should.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Niddy vs HSBC

Ok, I've had time to think about my response and other than deciding that if this decision is not reversed that i'll take legal action against the employee at the FOS, I have also decided to report his conduct in general to his senior manager.

Now you may think my letter is harsh, trust me it isn't - on the phone the pleb told me in no uncertain terms that he felt that the bank had acted extremely unfairly towards me and agreed that I was right - so sorry, summat has changed to make him write the shyte he did and ergo I hold him ultimately responsible for any mess to my credit files and thus I will consider suing him for his actions, I am awaiting a specialist solicitor in this field to return from X-Mas break to confirm what, if any, recourse is available to me (legal options)....

Obviously I expect this, based on my response below, to ruffle some feathers as my points are spot on - what the fuck was the adjudicator thinking of when he was simply wrong on each count? I'm still mad - everytime I think about this stupid assessment my blood boils

Dear Team Manager (Name removed at this stage)

I write with reference to an outstanding complaint against HSBC and an adjudicator who seems totally one-sided to the bank, ergo this email is in part a double sided complaint against your adjudicator and the Ombudsman service for total lack of transparency and what can only be classed as a shoddy service.

I will start by asking you to please listen to my call with the adjudicator then look at the parts of this complaint as the call will clearly confirm my claim that the adjudicator did agree with me and clearly stated he felt that the bank had acted unfairly toward me - so imagine my total shock and disbelief to see the email below, that can only be described as total nonsense - junk if you will.

Ok, I would like to confirm the following points in response to the adjudicators email to allow you to see things from my point of view.

1. I clearly explained in my complaint and in my conversation with the adjudicator that I got declined for an account in November 2008 yet when I went into branch (to appeal the decision) and met the manager she insisted I took the fee paying account. I also clearly stated that I didn't moan about this as at the time I was pleased to get a mainstream account from HSBC especially due to the previous ID fraud linked to me and I mentioned that the fee was irrelevant as it is back pocket change to me.

I also pointed out to the adjudicator both in my complaint and verbally that I did write to the bank, back in April, and cancel the fee paying subscription - this was totally ignored by the adjudicator (and the bank funnily enough), who felt the bank had done nothing wrong yet you've seen a copy of my letter to their Chief Exec cancelling the subscription - which, relevant enough had they acted when instructed my account would not be in breach of any terms, as at the time all this kicked off (March 2011) I was actually within my limits on all 3 accounts and upto that point I had never in over 2.5 years missed a single payment or had a charge - the bank could confirm this had they been consulted as to my history, prior to their involvement last March.

My main gripe here is that surely you can see, I was a perfect banking customer that had never had a single late payment in his life that suddenly went from hero to zero overnight because of an over-zealous bank employee named [Removed]? I had done nothing wrong, the bank did. I fully appreciate that they can close accounts, fine - but even the adjudicator mentioned their terms state 2 months grace is given but actually this is one month, and I was not even given that so please tell me what I could have done to stop this chain of events? It was totally out of my hands - however lets not be mistaken here, had the bank acted on my authority and cancelled the fee paying charge each month from April then I would not be defaulted. The only reason I went overdrawn is due to their charge - can't he see this? It's glaringly obvious even to a blind man! The fact the bank then removed my online access and never sent me any statements made it impossible to repay anything. The adjudicators notes whereby he assesses the debt would not have been repaid etc is total nonsense as he does not know my financial position - for the record, and if required, I will send in my Coventry statement showing my £X cash sitting in a savings account. Point proven - HAD the bank not 'sh*t' on me then I was more than capable and more than able to repay a poxy sum of £3,000 (total amount owed at the time).

Why then did the adjudicator rule against me on these points? I expect a detailed response to each point and his reasons for making such a bizarre catalogue of errors.

2. The adjudicator states that the fact the bank asked me to go in and identify myself (which I refused) was not acting unfairly, yet he seems to forget the fact I had already done this at the time I opened the account and also again with a senior underwriter called [Removed] so my attitude was why, why did I have to do it a third time - my response asking [Removed] of HSBC Fraud clearly outlines this fact and could not be missed even if he tried to miss it. The whole point here is that the bank did inconvenience me, the marker for ID fraud was already there when the account was opened and also when I opened the credit card in which I went through a fraud investigation a second time so as nothing had changed and I had nothing else to provide to the bank what could I do? Please tell me why the bank was fair to ask me to go for 3 interviews or whatever within the space of a year? That is nonsense, they simply cannot expect any customer to do that - nothing will ever change in the space of a year that would make them behave like this - as I say, part of my complaint was about the actions of the employee Lee Bouchard - this seems to have gone totally missed.

I expect a full and detailed response as to why these points were missed by the adjudicator as well.

3. The adjudicator has stated "I cannot safely conclude that the outstanding balance would have been repaid in time, had the bank provided the contractual notice period of two months. It would not be appropriate to recommend that the bank removes adverse credit reference information applied in respect of the current accounts, as it is reflects the history of the accounts." As mentioned above, he does not know my financial position and is wrong in his wild assessment however lets forget that for a moment and move on to the part where he thinks that an account that is in credit, that has had charges added after a customer asked for them to cease (i.e. the £12.95 fee which if cancelled simply downgrades your account - there was never any need to repay the balance at that point) should have adverse entries registered? I am more than happy to send in all statements until they stopped coming in May 2011, showing and proving that I was not in any breach so funny that the adjudicator seems to think it is acceptable then for the bank to register a default in April 2011 which is the same month I made a complaint and we both know that there are clear guidelines that prohibit such action occuring. Least, the fact the bank defaulted all three accounts in the same month that they decided to close them (as proven with previous emails showing my credit file entries) - ergo the bank have directly broken s.87 and s.88 of CCA1974 amongst other local policies via BBA, ICO & OFT yet your adjudicator thinks they have done no wrong?

Please, enlighten me.

4. Your adjudicator's attitude has been nothing short of shambolic from day one. He always replies last thing on a day, usually before being out of the office and when you reply to him he simply ignored you. Now I know this is not normal behaviour from the FOS as I was fortunate enough to have another complaint looked at by a professional named [Removed for Privacy Reasons] (at FOS) who was the opposite in every way of this adjudicator. She was not only timely in her replies, she also kept me fully up to date and dealt with things in such a professional manner I felt obliged to commend her to her manager [Removed for Privacy Reasons]. [Removed] on the other hand is a joke in comparison - maybe he supports HSBC, maybe not but whatever the reason he has treated me and my complaint like dirt and unless it is reviewed not only will I publish this via national press I will consider legal action against him in his capacity for being able to make such ludicrous decisions. After all, it is his decision that can ruin my credit ability which trust me, will not happen easily.

I can send a copy of my credit file post April and pre April - this will prove how I have gone from a perfect customer to a high risk yet your adjudicator thinks this is ok and doesn't seem to care about any of the wider implications to me - with my contacts - big mistake. That's all I can say.

I suggest you sit the adjudicator down and ask him frankly what the hell he was playing at when he rushed this through, taking into account his admission that he felt the bank had done wrong and that I was treated unfairly when he spoke with me a day or two earlier from typing that nonsense.

This whole fiasco is getting to the point where maybe legal action against the bank with FOS named on there is the best recourse for me - I really don't know but I would really appreciate some feedback based on the additional information above that was always there had the adjudicator not overlooked so much of my complaint.

I look forward to your response with something - anything?

An extremely annoyed

Niddy

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Niddy vs HSBC

Niddy,

Whilst the independent assessor cannot get involved with the merits of an ombudsman decision whether from the adjudicator or an ombudsman she can step in where FOS policy on resolving disputes has not been followed.

If you want to complain about the service provided by the Financial Ombudsman Service you need to complain to the Ombudsman Service before you can contact me and it needs to have time to reply at a senior level. Service covers the practical handling of a case, such as administration and following the correct process.
Send your complaint to the team manager, quoting the reference in the top left hand corner of Financial Ombudsman Service letters. If you are not satisfied by the team manager’s reply, write to the Head of Casework, using the same reference number.
The Ombudsman Service says that it should resolve service complaints within 20 working days. You need to allow time for the Ombudsman Service to respond to your complaint and tell you that it has completed its own internal procedures.
You have 3 months from the date of the Ombudsman Service’s final email or letter to ask me to look into your complaint.
Contact me: step 3

When you have the Ombudsman Service’s final response to your service complaint, you can write to me at
The Independent Assessor
PO Box 35738
London
E14 9YU
or email me at
independent.assessor@financial-ombudsman.org.uk
I use a PO Box to make sure my mail is kept completely separate from mail going to the Ombudsman Service.

I do strongly believe because they told you one thing then changed course fos policy on resolving disputes has not been followed.


independent assessor ?

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.u..._reference.htm

http://www.independent-assessor.org.uk/

BTW that letter is quite tame compared to some of yours I've read lol

[Susie]

Re: Niddy vs HSBC

That will be very nicely timed to hit them as a nice welcome back to work after the break.
Lets hope this time they take notice and sort it out.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Niddy vs HSBC

This thread is almost a year old now! I have just spoken to the Team Manager at FOS and asked him to pop in and take a look here.

Maybe he'll then see that my case needs reassessing but in any case, I want to keep my option for Ombudsman open as when I go public with this fiasco, I expect they'll want to have an option to reassess because I have a few contacts that are keen to publish and document this fiasco - free publicity for free - bonus

Will update you on any developments in the New year.

[mgfboy]

Re: Niddy vs HSBC

Niddy this is just as bad as FOS where with me and I'm still awaiting ( of well over a month) for the ombusman reply.

I think the problem is the guys don't really understand the concerns we have and how much this sort of thing effects us in the current credit market.

3 or 4 years ago, if you wanted a loan/mortgage I could speak to underwriters that where human and sort problems out, but now the market is so risk averse that your stuffed, even if you have good income etc.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Niddy vs HSBC

I am debating taking legal action against the actual officer at the FOS that made this decision - that'll be the killer blow.

Kinda like eating out, you used to sue the restaurant if you got poisoned, now you sue the chef directly especially in cases of gross negligence, which this FOS fiasco clearly is.

We'll see where this goes but I will not back down, we're a year in and still its HSBC shitting all over me with FOS approval, great - nice to know where you stand I suppose

[mgfboy]

Re: Niddy vs HSBC

My problem is HSBC have gone quite, they only contacted me about my old credit card, which I blow out of the water.

They haven't been in touch about my old joint account, my wifes loan or my large loan. Thats about £160k you would think that they would be opening a dialog by now and it's strange they are all showing as settled on the CRA's. Perhaps they have given up!!!

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Niddy vs HSBC

Seems the manager that was going to look into things has ermm, suddenly left the FOS!

More later - speaking to solicitor as I type, good news is I can sue the FOS (and have damn good grounds to as well)

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Niddy vs HSBC

Seems the manager that was going to look into things has ermm, suddenly left the FOS!

More later - speaking to solicitor as I type, good news is I can sue the FOS (and have damn good grounds to as well)

Well they do need bring down a peg or two and start acting in the consumers best interests which sadly is very lacking.

Good Luck

[mystery1]

Re: Niddy vs HSBC

Well they do need bring down a peg or two

Agree.

start acting in the consumers best interests which sadly is very lacking.

Disagree. They need to start doing their job fairly and get it right more often. They are supposed to take the facts and decide who is at fault, who is to blame for what and come up with a fair and just compromise/solution.

There should be no bias in either direction.

M1

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Niddy vs HSBC

Agree.



Disagree. They need to start doing their job fairly and get it right more often. They are supposed to take the facts and decide who is at fault, who is to blame for what and come up with a fair and just compromise/solution.

There should be no bias in either direction.

M1

Correct and that is what I meant, but it is a sad reflection that nearly all complaints brought to the FOS are just ones and all to often the FOS is sucking up to the banks.

The fact that the banks pay the fee win or lose does not mean a case should go in there favour if the facts prove different and that is happening all too often.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Niddy vs HSBC

There should be no bias in either direction.

EXACTLY

which is all I want......

I reiterated to the adjudicator earlier that in April I was within my limits and requested they cancel the fee paying element, they did not cancel it and charged me a fee (even though the account was 'closed' remember) thus exceeding the overdraft, they then default me (the same month, ie Aptil 2011) so no grace period to remedy given and best of all - the FOS think that is fine, well my adjudicator does.

So tell me how a 'closed' account can get a monthly fee applied, tell me how it can exceed an overdraft when I cancelled the fee element, and tell me where in the CCA it says they can default me within 12 days of them saying they're closing the account...? Ermmm, knock on wood time me thinks!

So I need him to clarify this as I am buggered if I can get my head round it - I was a perfect customer until the point they did not cancel my fee charging element as per the 28 days notice I did give - worse, I should have paid one more fee - not 10! Anyway........